Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel+bounces-171708-linux.lists.archive=gmail.com@vger.kernel.org designates 139.178.88.99 as permitted sender) client-ip=139.178.88.99;
Date: Tue, 7 May 2024 17:42:34 +0200
From: =?utf-8?Q?Micka=C3=ABl_Sala=C3=BCn?= <mic@digikod.net>
To: Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com>
Cc: Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>, 
	Christian Brauner <brauner@kernel.org>, Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>, 
	Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>, Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>, 
	Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org>, Sasha Levin <sashal@kernel.org>, 
	Shengyu Li <shengyu.li.evgeny@gmail.com>, Shuah Khan <shuah@kernel.org>, 
	Shuah Khan <skhan@linuxfoundation.org>, Bagas Sanjaya <bagasdotme@gmail.com>, 
	Brendan Higgins <brendanhiggins@google.com>, David Gow <davidgow@google.com>, 
	"David S . Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>, Florian Fainelli <florian.fainelli@broadcom.com>, 
	=?utf-8?Q?G=C3=BCnther?= Noack <gnoack@google.com>, Jon Hunter <jonathanh@nvidia.com>, Ron Economos <re@w6rz.net>, 
	Ronald Warsow <rwarsow@gmx.de>, Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au>, 
	Will Drewry <wad@chromium.org>, kernel test robot <oliver.sang@intel.com>, kvm@vger.kernel.org, 
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org, 
	stable@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 00/10] Fix Kselftest's vfork() side effects
Message-ID: <20240507.aevi0xaeWohb@digikod.net>
References: <20240506165518.474504-1-mic@digikod.net>
 <202405061002.01D399877A@keescook>
 <Zjo1xyhjmehsRhZ2@google.com>
Precedence: bulk
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
In-Reply-To: <Zjo1xyhjmehsRhZ2@google.com>

On Tue, May 07, 2024 at 07:12:51AM GMT, Sean Christopherson wrote:
> On Mon, May 06, 2024, Kees Cook wrote:
> > On Mon, May 06, 2024 at 06:55:08PM +0200, Mickaël Salaün wrote:
> > > Shuah, I think this should be in -next really soon to make sure
> > > everything works fine for the v6.9 release, which is not currently the
> > > case.  I cannot test against all kselftests though.  I would prefer to
> > > let you handle this, but I guess you're not able to do so and I'll push
> > > it on my branch without reply from you.  Even if I push it on my branch,
> > > please push it on yours too as soon as you see this and I'll remove it
> > > from mine.
> > 
> > Yes, please. Getting this into v6.9 is preferred,
> 
> Very strongly prefered for KVM selftests.  The negative impact on KVM isn't that
> the bugs cause failures, it's that they cause false passes, which is far worse
> (and why the bugs went unnoticed for most of the cycle).

FYI it's now in linux-next.